If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Well here are some results for the Vargas Stage III upgrade that has caused the N54 forum section to basically be engaged in chaos for the past few months. From accusations of vaporware, to comparison to single turbo upgrades, to countless other arguments the day has come and the Stage III Vargas Turbo upgrade dyno'd on 91 octane with no meth 572 horsepower to the rear wheels. This is with a Cobb flash tuned by BimmerBoost vendor Pro-Tuning Freaks.

Impressive? Yep, sure is and this seems to also be a 91 octane pump gas only world record for the N54. Now keep in mind this is just the beginning. What will it do with meth? What will do on E85? What will it do with race gas and big boost? What about different turbos? Sky appears to be the limit but for now this kind of performance on pump gas sure is a big boost (hah, get it?) to the N54 scene.

Congratulations to all involved, Vargas Turbo Tech, Pro-Tuning Freaks, Cobb, and just the N54 community as well. The impossible just became possible. Pictures, video, and dynograph below.

Speaking of stuff in your sig, Terry could I get more info on the N54 Stock Turbos WHP WR (456)??? Specifically what it stock baselined at (to determine the delta) & on what kinda dyno (not that it really matter, but just to avoid forum BS).

Speaking of stuff in your sig, Terry could I get more info on the N54 Stock Turbos WHP WR (456)??? Specifically what it stock baselined at (to determine the delta) & on what kinda dyno (not that it really matter, but just to avoid forum BS).

Sure, same dynojet we always use @ specialty Z. 100% unmodified N54s on pump normally put down 275-280rw there. Once you get involved with heavy mods, a back end flash, JB4, etc, there really is no baseline. It can be whatever you want it to be.

I run load at 110 because that is the only way to get the DME to give proper post shift timing consistently with automatics. It's a bit of a headache at times but Cobb added a 3d fuel scaling table awhile ago that made it a lot cleaner. I'd love for them to expose all the timing tables which would allow us to do up the back end flash differently. Some day. But we can't have cars running slower than they should be until then. So we do the best we can with the tools we have and keep our eyes open for areas to improve.

As I said before if D wants to believe whatever he is doing is the best way more power to him. No reason to bicker over it. Normally these types of scores are settled at the track or runway anyway.

That timing flatline is a real $#@! whore fwiw. Only way for the car to run even close to its potential on a 6AT is to stack.

Flash only is the best way to do things... only if all the tables are available. Unfortunately they are not which is why we stack instead of dealing with utter nonsense trying to workaround DME limitations.

What is this timing flatline you speak of?? I haven't had the issue since the Alpina flash & revised PROtunes

Short shift 3-4 on an E85 tune around 6200 RPM, log, report back. The major correction on the 3-4 shift still isn't fixed. It's only fixed for 5th and 6th gear which was a completely different issue. If it were a 3 degree correction on those cylinders all the time post-shift, that's something all of us can live with, problem is that isn't the case.

Either way, getting a transmission flash to work around a tuning issue that can't be fixed otherwise is no better than stacking a piggyback for boost control.

To this date, I still can't figure out why people are harping on keeping everything in the DME, especially when these tuners are simply trying to find ways around those limitations akin to a piggyback. Try running race code on a 6AT with RBs/VTT stg2/etc. and see what happens.

Like I said earlier, give me all the tables, and I'll be the first to praise flash tuning. Until then it's an unnecessary donkey race fighting against the DME logic, the same logic the tuners are praising.

You can run a 190 load straight across and then stack a piggyback, but won't save your transmission any more so than running a 100 load straight across.

Besides, the transmission can perceive torque independent of the DME and make adjustments, hence why transmission adaptations are present in INPA. The same reason why the Alpina flash works in regards to fixing your issue, at least in 5th.

Of course, if you have a 6MT and don't have NLS/2-step, Cobb may be the best solution.

-edit I was responding to a good number of you, too lazy to quote everyone.

@themyst, what data do you have correlating load vs what the transmission is doing (e.g. line pressure)? I would love to see some hard data proving one or the other. All we know at the moment is that by flashing the TCU the 5th gear flatline issue is fixed given the data gathered.

themyst , what data do you have correlating load vs what the transmission is doing (e.g. line pressure)? I would love to see some hard data proving one or the other. All we know at the moment is that by flashing the TCU the 5th gear flatline issue is fixed given the data gathered.

@Terry@BMS Any chance you could share a log showing rpm boost timing and 6AT line pressure before/after your changes?

Not at this time. Maybe some day. But the log would have for example rpm, gear, pedal input, line pressure, fluid temperature, torque target, actual torque, torque converter lockup status, etc. The trans module does not monitor timing or boost.